Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
OICA proposal
2500 x 800 mm
29 44 kJ
Energy
Impactor
Arm
Overlap
100% overlap
Energy for trucks > 7.5 t GVM could be increased to 50 kJ (+14%) to increase severity and occupant protection Any reduction of impactor size would require maintaining current energy level of 44.1 kJ and redefinition of location of impactor (150 mm below R-point) to avoid interaction with lower windscreens
4
of 29.4 kJ is adequate
At least for N1 vehicles, approval to UNECE R33 or UNECE R94 should be possible alternative to the manufacturer
Impactor size 2500 x 800 mm Rigid beams for impactor suspension CG: 50 mm below R-point CG in median longitudinal plane of truck
N2 > 7.5 t GVM and N3: 50 kJ impact energy N2 7.5 t GVM and N1: 29.4 kJ impact energy At least for N1 vehicles, allow UNECE R33 or UNECE R94 as alternative
98 kN
180 rollover identified in various regions as a major injury causation accident configuration, especially in Europe and USA (but less so in Japan)
8
20
Test 1 - dynamic pre-deformation: Rigid platen Inclined 20 to the vertical Energy level: 17.6 kJ Direction of the impact: perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the cab
9
20
Test 2 quasi-static load: On same cab as test 1 Rigid platen Force = maximum authorised load front axle(s), 98 kN Direction of the load: vertical
10
11
13
Based on Swedish test, with further improvements: Steel pendulum 1,000 kg Inclined 45 to vertical, 15 in horizontal XZ plane Impact direction: 15 to vehicle longitudinal axis Impact energy 30 kJ
14
15
Calculations should be acceptable alternative to physical tests for the 3 impact configurations (front, 90 and 180 rollover) Extension of approvals for cabs approved to UNECE R29.02 should remain possible indefinitely
16
Conclusion
OICA proposals to revise UNECE R29: Frontal impact (increased energy level) 90 rollover with subsequent impact (new test) 180 rollover (addition of dynamic pre-load) OICA proposals represent clear improvement to safety of truck cabs 7.5 t GVM, based on accident data (Europe, USA, Japan) OICA proposals very severe and need adequate transitional provisions: 5 years (minimum) for new approvals Existing cabs cannot meet (re-design would result in new approvals!) Extension of approvals to remain possible Current UNECE R29.02 requirements however adequate for lighter trucks UNECE R94 should be possible alternative for light trucks
17
18